Guwahati Court September 2011 Judgments

New India Assurance Co. Vs. Smt. Nazma Begum and Others

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: 2012AIR(Gau)42

1. Heard Mr. I. Imsang, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Kakheto Sema, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 and Mr. N. Mozhui, learned counsel for the respondent No.5. 2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 26-2-2010 rendered by the learned Member, MACT, Dimapur (for short, “MACT”) in MAC Case No.117/2008 whereby and whereunder, the appellant has been directed to pay Rs. 60,400/- only after deduction of interim award of Rs. 50,000/- to the respondents/claimants by way of cheque/demand draft within 30 days from the date of order failing which interest at the rate of Rs. 9% p.a. shall be added to be awarded mount from 18-6-2008 i.e. the date of filing of the claim petition till awarded sum is fully realized. 3. For appreciation of the issues involved the brief facts of the case are narrated. The respondent Nos.1,2,3 and 4 re the wife, mother, sister and minor son of the deceased person who was a driver by profession. On 1-4-2007, wh...

Snigdhtanu Shah Vs. State of Tripura and Others

Court: Guwahati

1. Heard Mr. Somik Deb, learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. N.C. Pal, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 3, and Mr. P.K. Biswas, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India, appearing for respondent No.4. 2. Pursuant to the notification, calling for applications for admission into the MBBS Course in Agartala Government Medical College, the petitioner herein, having obtained more than 50% marks in Physics, Chemistry and Biology in the qualifying examination, namely, Higher Secondary (+2 stage), conducted by the Tripura Board of Secondary Education, applied for admission into the MBBS course and as he was qualified, in terms of the Medical Council of India (‘MCI’ for short) regulations, to appear in the combined competitive examination, popularly known, in the State of Tripura, as the Joint Entrance Examination (in short ‘JEE’), he, having been allowed, appeared in the combined competitive examination. The...

Niranjan Khodal and Others Vs. Sukra Khodal

Court: Guwahati

Oral: 1. This revision petition is at the instance of the plaintiffs. The petitioners are challenging the legality and correctness of the order dated 04.04.2009, passed by the learned Munsiff, Tezpur, in Title Suit No. 49 of 2007, whereby, the learned trial Judge expunged the affidavit evidence of PW-3, who, incidentally was impleaded in the suit as proforma defendant No. 1. 2. Heard Sri P Sundi, learned counsel, for the petitioners as well as Sri R Bordoloi, learned counsel for the sole respondent/principal defendant. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that both the parties in the suit are related to each other. The main contest is between the plaintiffs and their uncle. For a fair decision of the suit, the cousin of the plaintiffs, being the children of the brother of the defendant, they were also impleaded in the suit as proforma defendants. The proforma defendants are the brother and sisters. 4. After receiving summons from the Court, none of the proforma defendan...

Dwarika Prasad Vs. State of Assam

Court: Guwahati

1. The petitioner herein is the proprietor of M/s. Sadhu Industries and Oil Mill situated at Lalpatty, Hojai. He has been convicted under Section 7 read with Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the PFA Act) and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six (6) months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default RI for two (2) months vide judgment and order dated 25-7-2002 passed by the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Hojai at Sankardev Nagar in C.R. Case No. 1 of 1997. On appeal, the aforesaid judgment and order of conviction was affirmed by the judgment dated 30-8-2003 passed in Criminal Appeal No.39 of 2002 by ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Hojai at Sankardev Nagar. Being convicted and sentenced as indicated above by the impugned judgment and order, the same is challenged by this instant Criminal Revision Petition. 2. I have heard Mr.B.M. Choudhury, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. B.Gogoi, lear...